This trailer on German site PC Games Hardware shows NVIDIA at Computex demonstrating the promised DirectX 11 patch for Crysis 2, which is said to be coming to Crytek's first-person shooter sequel "very very soon." Of course there's no better way to show off high-fidelity graphics than by using a handheld camera shooting a monitor from the back of the room, so that is how this clip was shot. The narration is in English, though, so we get to hear a description of the DirectX 11 effects.

Ludomancer wrote on May 31, 2011, 18:00:I was surprised at how good this game was. I think Crytek made a good decision to way on DX11 implementation. They understand that it's just a marketing trick that Microsoft used to push people to their new OSes. I'm glad someone was smart enough, and had big enough balls, to stand up to them over it. A lot of other devs have caved.

Out of the many, many, many reasons to upgrade to Windows 7, DX11 is approximately 4598 on the list.

If it wasn't for the flying sperm shooting icicles, I would have enjoyed the game much more.

Warhead was better than the first game...had to suffer fewer of the sperm enemies.

Opinions run all over the place. Warhead was painful. I finished like 3/4 of it and couldn't handle any more, and I rarely quit games before the ending but I did just that with Warhead. The 'first game' was significantly better.

I liked Warhead much more as well.

I beat Crysis once but whenever I replay it now I quit when I get to the alien bullshit. Especially when yo get in the ship.

I have no love for Crysis 2, but DX11 is brilliant. Shogun 2 is so much better now with DX11 on my middling system, I do not know how much it will help something that can already do the high res AA and whatnot, but it made all the difference for me.

If it wasn't for the flying sperm shooting icicles, I would have enjoyed the game much more.

Warhead was better than the first game...had to suffer fewer of the sperm enemies.

Opinions run all over the place. Warhead was painful. I finished like 3/4 of it and couldn't handle any more, and I rarely quit games before the ending but I did just that with Warhead. The 'first game' was significantly better.

Do people like to bitch just for the sake of bitching in an attempt to be different, when deep down inside they know they really liked it?

Maybe people genuinely didn't like the game? I can't say it was a badly made game, it certainly had stellar production values but I just didn't enjoy it. The open style of fps gameplay didn't contrast well with the cluttered levels and type of game it was. They didn't change it up enough with the suit, I was expecting more there. It doesn't mean I want it burned in the fires of hell. Can people still form an opinion contrary to someone else without it making them or you a fanboy?

Do people like to bitch just for the sake of bitching in an attempt to be different, when deep down inside they know they really liked it?

To each their own, of course, but I thought Crysis 2 was fun with beautifully designed levels - especially the post alien destruction level designs, which were 'very' well done! The replay-ability is good too, as there are different approaches to levels/situations that can/will change the game play and outcome each time.

All in all it was a great game, but I will say that it was too consolized and spoon fed the player 'a little' too much with the 'Tactical Options Available', etc. Since it is a console port, everything was released at the same time with DX9, with the forthcoming DX11 for PC. So, I do look forward to playing through it again once the DX11 is released.

I was surprised at how good this game was. I think Crytek made a good decision to way on DX11 implementation. They understand that it's just a marketing trick that Microsoft used to push people to their new OSes. I'm glad someone was smart enough, and had big enough balls, to stand up to them over it. A lot of other devs have caved.

I'm not sure I understand this...I feel like Crytek has long been the cheerleader for MS's new DX versions. I recall them making crysis disable features under DX9 so that DX10 versions would look better. Then people would manually enable these things so the DX9 version looked as best as it could. (and it was really close to DX10)

They did this again on crysis 2 right? The DX9 version has a bunch of stuff turned off deliberately that makes no sense if you just want the gamer to have the best experience possible. Shouldn't you just work at making the game as good as possible on any hardware?

If consumers still called an 800 number for service and running certain effects on dx9 caused more errors I could understand but troubleshooting is basically handeled by the community now via message boards. (and some knowledge base content)

I was surprised at how good this game was. I think Crytek made a good decision to way on DX11 implementation. They understand that it's just a marketing trick that Microsoft used to push people to their new OSes. I'm glad someone was smart enough, and had big enough balls, to stand up to them over it. A lot of other devs have caved.